Symbols, meaning, and action: The past, present, and future of symbolic interactionism

Abstract

Symbolic interactionism is a theoretical perspective in sociology that addresses the manner in which society is created and maintained through face-to-face, repeated, meaningful interactions among individuals. This article surveys past theory and research in the interactionist tradition. It first provides an overview of three main trajectories in symbolic interactionist thought, focusing on the work of Herbert Blumer (the Chicago School), Manford Kuhn (the Iowa School), and Sheldon Stryker (the Indiana School). A brief summary of each figure’s general perspective on symbolic interactionism is given, followed by a discussion of the research methodology that defines and distinguishes each. The article then reviews and assesses the empirical research that has emerged from these trajectories over the past decades, beginning with the classical studies of the mid-twentieth century and culminating in research programs that have emerged in the contemporary era. Specifically, this article surveys significant contributions to the symbolic interactionist literature in areas such as dramaturgy, cultural studies, postmodernism, gender/status/power, self and identity, collective behavior and social movements, and social context and the environment. It concludes with a discussion of future directions symbolic interactionists should take in continuing to develop the field.

“I Don't Want to Make the Same Mistakes”: Relationship Education Among Low‐Income Single Adults

“…Using complementarity (DeCuir‐Gunby, ) and symbolic interactionism (Blumer, ), we discuss processes and outcomes that emerged from the data, then examine convergence and divergence of the qualitative and quantitative analyses. Consistent with a view that meaning is constructed via interaction (Carter & Fuller, ), the data overall show changes in attitudes and knowledge about relationships and point toward behavioral change.…”

Symbolic Interactionism in Canada: Shared Meaning and the Perpetuation of Ideas

“…The increasing use of symbolic interactionist insights by SI‐accommodatives, what Maines (:16) calls “unaware interactionists,” led Sandstrom and Fine () to predict that assumptions of interactionist theory would become so incorporated throughout sociology that the perspective would cease to exist as a discrete theoretical approach. However, as Carter and Fuller (:950) point out, “symbolic interactionism continues to be … widely recognized … within sociology.” This remains true today. The vast majority of sociology textbooks in use at Canadian universities present symbolic interactionism as a theoretical perspective in its own right.…”

“…The important point is that the ideas that underpin symbolic interactionism remain in use by Canadian sociologists, even if they are being used by “unaware interactionists” (Maines :16). This helps to ensure the existence of symbolic interactionism in Canada because as long as the ideas remain in currency in sociology they can be traced back to their origins (Carter and Fuller ) . Another contemporary example of the assumptions of symbolic interactionism being kept alive in the public eye in Canada was the recent citing of the Thomas and Thomas () theorem by Ari Melber, host of “The Beat with Ari Melber,” a political commentary show on MSNBC.…”

“…Thus, the presence of postmodernist theory is as likely to buoy up symbolic interactionism as it is to sink it. Regarding the impact of feminist theory, Carter and Fuller () document the number of scholars using symbolic interactionism to study gender, from Goffman's (, ) work on gender displays and advertisements, to more recent research on masculinity in 2015. And for Mary Jo Deegan () it has always been thus, that there has been a feminist symbolic interactionism.…”

Persona in MMO Games: Constructing an identity through complex player/character relationships

“…The ranking will change based on the situation, so the individual may primarily present a mother when speaking to a child, but a professor when speaking to a student. Using this paradigm, the individual is not linked to a singular identity (a unified self), but instead is tied to a selection process through which their identities are defined and used in socially significant ways (Carter & Fuller 2016). This perspective on identity meshes well with the theoretical framework of dramaturgy.…”